The Abandoned Child: The 10th Amendment

[PratchettFan]

So you can't specify where they is actually happening? Then why mention it?

You seem to be communicating from a different planet. They is WHAT happening?

My error. I meant where this is happening. Can you tell us specifically what you are talking about, or are you just generally saying we need to keep the 10th amendment in mind?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

So you can't specify where they is actually happening? Then why mention it?

You seem to be communicating from a different planet. They is WHAT happening?

My error. I meant where this is happening. Can you tell us specifically what you are talking about, or are you just generally saying we need to keep the 10th amendment in mind?

In a nutshell -

Judicial Revision An assumption of powers never meant to be granted Tenth Amendment Center

 

[PratchettFan]

So you can't specify where they is actually happening? Then why mention it?

You seem to be communicating from a different planet. They is WHAT happening?

My error. I meant where this is happening. Can you tell us specifically what you are talking about, or are you just generally saying we need to keep the 10th amendment in mind?

In a nutshell -

Judicial Revision An assumption of powers never meant to be granted Tenth Amendment Center

So, nothing specific. All is good then. Thanks for the heads up. We'll be sure to be on the watch in case this should ever happen.

 

[RKMBrown]

Sorry but the 14th usurps the 10th.

Please expound.

...nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

What part do you want to talk about?

Well, let's talk about that part. How does that support, or even have anything to do with your claim that the 14th usurps the 10th?

Prior to the 14th the fed could not send money to the states for the purpose of depriving life, liberty, and property with due process of law. Prior to the 14th the states could deny equal protection of the laws to any person within it's jurisdiction. Prior to the 14th the states ruled citizens independently. After.. they became willing partners with the feds in cases where our rights can be taken from us indiscriminately... and they lost all power to discriminate.

This is most interesting study you're proffering, because this discussion does not concern individual rights or discrimination or anything of the like, but rather the limits of the authority of the federal government as limited by the 10th Amendment, which remains in force and therefore, the law of the land.

The only amendment overturned by another was the 18th, by the 21st.

The bill of rights... is a list of declaratory and restrictive clauses. While the main focus is on the restrictive clauses that thus bind the federal government... the 10th is a declaratory clause.

Note how the 14th amendment neutered the declaration in the 10th. Note how there are two ways to change earlier amendments through further amendments, the first way is to provide clarifications and further amendments, such as how the 14th worked. The second way is to overturn one completely.

What I'm trying to explain to you is that before the 14th.. and to a great extent the 16th and 17th amendments. The states had the ability to "box" the feds. Now the constitution is upside down with the states boxed in by the feds. The states are now relegated to one of paupers that fund the other states... or willing partners in the trashing of this country. The 10th amendment has no teeth any longer. The feds can take all of the income out of a state... and do with it as the feds see fit (see 16th amendment). The states can do nothing about it... (see 14th amendment and 17th amendment with the people's votes running the senate not senators that report to the states).

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Note how there are two ways to change earlier amendments through further amendments, the first way is to provide clarifications and further amendments

A clarification cannot undo the original intent.

Now the constitution is upside down with the states boxed in by the feds.

In that we agree.

The feds can take all of the income out of a state

At the risk of insurrection, I suppose.

The states can do nothing about it.

That is a silly statement.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

So, nothing specific. All is good then. Thanks for the heads up. We'll be sure to be on the watch in case this should ever happen.

There are several specifics, an example being the federal government cannot dictate the moral structure within a state against 1st's free expression clause.

 

[RKMBrown]

Note how there are two ways to change earlier amendments through further amendments, the first way is to provide clarifications and further amendments

A clarification cannot undo the original intent.

Now the constitution is upside down with the states boxed in by the feds.

In that we agree.

The feds can take all of the income out of a state

At the risk of insurrection, I suppose.

The states can do nothing about it.

That is a silly statement.

A clarification can completely neuter the original intent. See 17th amendment with the states no longer having a voice at all in DC. See 16th amendment with the feds being able to take the income away from a state and send it to other states. Together with the 14th, the original intent of the entire Constitution is now completely upside down, with the growth and power of the Federal Government to continue completely unabated. Look at these h1b visas.. ROFL they are bringing in cheap labor to replace professional American STEM workers and the people and states have ABSOLUTELY NO SAY WHATSOEVER ABOUT IT.

For example, Obamacare... sign up and receive the rewards that your tax payer's are forced to fun anyway or let the citizens of your state get completely screwed over by being forced to fund health care for other states with their income.

Insurrection? Have you not noticed every federal agency arming itself to the teeth? Internment camps going up all around the country? Tens of millions of "coffins" being prepped? The feds are insuring that any insurrection would be easily quelled.

Not silly, Fed law is supreme in all matters, whether the laws are reasonable, constitutional, or not... see fed success at stopping Arizonans from protecting themselves. The Fed going so far at to join a law suit with mexico against Arizonans.

You want to fix this country... you're gonna have to start in DC they own all the cards.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Note how there are two ways to change earlier amendments through further amendments, the first way is to provide clarifications and further amendments

A clarification cannot undo the original intent.

Now the constitution is upside down with the states boxed in by the feds.

In that we agree.

The feds can take all of the income out of a state

At the risk of insurrection, I suppose.

The states can do nothing about it.

That is a silly statement.

A clarification can completely neuter the original intent. See 17th amendment with the states no longer having a voice at all in DC. See 16th amendment with the feds being able to take the income away from a state and send it to other states. Together with the 14th, the original intent of the entire Constitution is now completely upside down, with the growth and power of the Federal Government to continue completely unabated. Look at these h1b visas.. ROFL they are bringing in cheap labor to replace professional American STEM workers and the people and states have ABSOLUTELY NO SAY WHATSOEVER ABOUT IT.

For example, Obamacare... sign up and receive the rewards that your tax payer's are forced to fun anyway or let the citizens of your state get completely screwed over by being forced to fund health care for other states with their income.

Insurrection? Have you not noticed every federal agency arming itself to the teeth? Internment camps going up all around the country? Tens of millions of "coffins" being prepped? The feds are insuring that any insurrection would be easily quelled.

Not silly, Fed law is supreme in all matters, whether the laws are reasonable, constitutional, or not... see fed success at stopping Arizonans from protecting themselves. The Fed going so far at to join a law suit with mexico against Arizonans.

You want to fix this country... you're gonna have to start in DC they own all the cards.

Ummmm ... okay, if you say so. We are obviously live in different dimensions.

As to quelling a major insurrection - something we definitely don't want here - the numbers don't favor the feds. The approximate total of all military personnel is about 2,500,000. The total number of armed citizens is over 100,000,000, perhaps well over, and how many with military training is anyone's guess. Now even assuming that all federal forces would feel free to fire upon Americans - an unlikely event considering the politics of our day - and also assuming that say oh, half of armed citizens stayed out of the fray, the numbers are overwhelming.

Even the Chinese have recognized that America could never be defeated by invasion. We have the largest civilian army in the world.

I do agree that DC is the place to start, but that does not render the states impotent.

 

[PratchettFan]

So, nothing specific. All is good then. Thanks for the heads up. We'll be sure to be on the watch in case this should ever happen.

There are several specifics, an example being the federal government cannot dictate the moral structure within a state against 1st's free expression clause.

A state doesn't have a "moral structure". However, the 1st amendment provides for the right of the citizens to express themselves. Are you saying that the states should be able to lock you up for saying something the governor doesn't like and you have no recourse to the federal courts or relief?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

A state doesn't have a "moral structure".

Too long an issue to deal with here today.

Are you saying that the states should be able to lock you up for saying something the governor doesn't like and you have no recourse to the federal courts or relief?

Of course not, but am referring to the pressure to engage in support for events with which one's conscience disagrees or risk being shut down for lack of acceptance.

 

[RKMBrown]

Note how there are two ways to change earlier amendments through further amendments, the first way is to provide clarifications and further amendments

A clarification cannot undo the original intent.

Now the constitution is upside down with the states boxed in by the feds.

In that we agree.

The feds can take all of the income out of a state

At the risk of insurrection, I suppose.

The states can do nothing about it.

That is a silly statement.

A clarification can completely neuter the original intent. See 17th amendment with the states no longer having a voice at all in DC. See 16th amendment with the feds being able to take the income away from a state and send it to other states. Together with the 14th, the original intent of the entire Constitution is now completely upside down, with the growth and power of the Federal Government to continue completely unabated. Look at these h1b visas.. ROFL they are bringing in cheap labor to replace professional American STEM workers and the people and states have ABSOLUTELY NO SAY WHATSOEVER ABOUT IT.

For example, Obamacare... sign up and receive the rewards that your tax payer's are forced to fun anyway or let the citizens of your state get completely screwed over by being forced to fund health care for other states with their income.

Insurrection? Have you not noticed every federal agency arming itself to the teeth? Internment camps going up all around the country? Tens of millions of "coffins" being prepped? The feds are insuring that any insurrection would be easily quelled.

Not silly, Fed law is supreme in all matters, whether the laws are reasonable, constitutional, or not... see fed success at stopping Arizonans from protecting themselves. The Fed going so far at to join a law suit with mexico against Arizonans.

You want to fix this country... you're gonna have to start in DC they own all the cards.

Ummmm ... okay, if you say so. We are obviously live in different dimensions.

As to quelling a major insurrection - something we definitely don't want here - the numbers don't favor the feds. The approximate total of all military personnel is about 2,500,000. The total number of armed citizens is over 100,000,000, perhaps well over, and how many with military training is anyone's guess. Now even assuming that all federal forces would feel free to fire upon Americans - an unlikely event considering the politics of our day - and also assuming that say oh, half of armed citizens stayed out of the fray, the numbers are overwhelming.

Even the Chinese have recognized that America could never be defeated by invasion. We have the largest civilian army in the world.

I do agree that DC is the place to start, but that does not render the states impotent.

Armed? Against tanks, helicopters, and fighter jets?

 

[PratchettFan]

A state doesn't have a "moral structure".

Too long an issue to deal with here today.

Are you saying that the states should be able to lock you up for saying something the governor doesn't like and you have no recourse to the federal courts or relief?

Of course not, but am referring to the pressure to engage in support for events with which one's conscience disagrees or risk being shut down for lack of acceptance.

The 1st amendment states: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Nowhere in there does it say the states can't make such laws. It says Congress can't make them. The only way you can extend the 1st amendment to the states is to consider them under federal jurisdiction. If the federal courts do not have this authority then the states can limit free speech, create a state religion and jail you for failing to attend church, and lock up anyone carrying a sign that disagrees with them.

Now, the only way the federal government pressures states is by the threat of withholding money. Where in the Constitution does it say the federal government can't put conditions on money it gives to the states?

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Note how there are two ways to change earlier amendments through further amendments, the first way is to provide clarifications and further amendments

A clarification cannot undo the original intent.

Now the constitution is upside down with the states boxed in by the feds.

In that we agree.

The feds can take all of the income out of a state

At the risk of insurrection, I suppose.

The states can do nothing about it.

That is a silly statement.

A clarification can completely neuter the original intent. See 17th amendment with the states no longer having a voice at all in DC. See 16th amendment with the feds being able to take the income away from a state and send it to other states. Together with the 14th, the original intent of the entire Constitution is now completely upside down, with the growth and power of the Federal Government to continue completely unabated. Look at these h1b visas.. ROFL they are bringing in cheap labor to replace professional American STEM workers and the people and states have ABSOLUTELY NO SAY WHATSOEVER ABOUT IT.

For example, Obamacare... sign up and receive the rewards that your tax payer's are forced to fun anyway or let the citizens of your state get completely screwed over by being forced to fund health care for other states with their income.

Insurrection? Have you not noticed every federal agency arming itself to the teeth? Internment camps going up all around the country? Tens of millions of "coffins" being prepped? The feds are insuring that any insurrection would be easily quelled.

Not silly, Fed law is supreme in all matters, whether the laws are reasonable, constitutional, or not... see fed success at stopping Arizonans from protecting themselves. The Fed going so far at to join a law suit with mexico against Arizonans.

You want to fix this country... you're gonna have to start in DC they own all the cards.

Ummmm ... okay, if you say so. We are obviously live in different dimensions.

As to quelling a major insurrection - something we definitely don't want here - the numbers don't favor the feds. The approximate total of all military personnel is about 2,500,000. The total number of armed citizens is over 100,000,000, perhaps well over, and how many with military training is anyone's guess. Now even assuming that all federal forces would feel free to fire upon Americans - an unlikely event considering the politics of our day - and also assuming that say oh, half of armed citizens stayed out of the fray, the numbers are overwhelming.

Even the Chinese have recognized that America could never be defeated by invasion. We have the largest civilian army in the world.

I do agree that DC is the place to start, but that does not render the states impotent.

Armed? Against tanks, helicopters, and fighter jets?

Count on your fingers. Consider Vietnam and ME. Insurgencies/belligerent powers are not to be trifled with.

And again, consider the likelihood that in this time much of the rank and file would bolt.

 

[PratchettFan]

Note how there are two ways to change earlier amendments through further amendments, the first way is to provide clarifications and further amendments

A clarification cannot undo the original intent.

Now the constitution is upside down with the states boxed in by the feds.

In that we agree.

The feds can take all of the income out of a state

At the risk of insurrection, I suppose.

The states can do nothing about it.

That is a silly statement.

A clarification can completely neuter the original intent. See 17th amendment with the states no longer having a voice at all in DC. See 16th amendment with the feds being able to take the income away from a state and send it to other states. Together with the 14th, the original intent of the entire Constitution is now completely upside down, with the growth and power of the Federal Government to continue completely unabated. Look at these h1b visas.. ROFL they are bringing in cheap labor to replace professional American STEM workers and the people and states have ABSOLUTELY NO SAY WHATSOEVER ABOUT IT.

For example, Obamacare... sign up and receive the rewards that your tax payer's are forced to fun anyway or let the citizens of your state get completely screwed over by being forced to fund health care for other states with their income.

Insurrection? Have you not noticed every federal agency arming itself to the teeth? Internment camps going up all around the country? Tens of millions of "coffins" being prepped? The feds are insuring that any insurrection would be easily quelled.

Not silly, Fed law is supreme in all matters, whether the laws are reasonable, constitutional, or not... see fed success at stopping Arizonans from protecting themselves. The Fed going so far at to join a law suit with mexico against Arizonans.

You want to fix this country... you're gonna have to start in DC they own all the cards.

Ummmm ... okay, if you say so. We are obviously live in different dimensions.

As to quelling a major insurrection - something we definitely don't want here - the numbers don't favor the feds. The approximate total of all military personnel is about 2,500,000. The total number of armed citizens is over 100,000,000, perhaps well over, and how many with military training is anyone's guess. Now even assuming that all federal forces would feel free to fire upon Americans - an unlikely event considering the politics of our day - and also assuming that say oh, half of armed citizens stayed out of the fray, the numbers are overwhelming.

Even the Chinese have recognized that America could never be defeated by invasion. We have the largest civilian army in the world.

I do agree that DC is the place to start, but that does not render the states impotent.

This assumes all of the US citizens joined the insurrection. I'd say it's more likely the vast majority of those citizens would side with the government.

 

[RKMBrown]

Note how there are two ways to change earlier amendments through further amendments, the first way is to provide clarifications and further amendments

A clarification cannot undo the original intent.

Now the constitution is upside down with the states boxed in by the feds.

In that we agree.

The feds can take all of the income out of a state

At the risk of insurrection, I suppose.

The states can do nothing about it.

That is a silly statement.

A clarification can completely neuter the original intent. See 17th amendment with the states no longer having a voice at all in DC. See 16th amendment with the feds being able to take the income away from a state and send it to other states. Together with the 14th, the original intent of the entire Constitution is now completely upside down, with the growth and power of the Federal Government to continue completely unabated. Look at these h1b visas.. ROFL they are bringing in cheap labor to replace professional American STEM workers and the people and states have ABSOLUTELY NO SAY WHATSOEVER ABOUT IT.

For example, Obamacare... sign up and receive the rewards that your tax payer's are forced to fun anyway or let the citizens of your state get completely screwed over by being forced to fund health care for other states with their income.

Insurrection? Have you not noticed every federal agency arming itself to the teeth? Internment camps going up all around the country? Tens of millions of "coffins" being prepped? The feds are insuring that any insurrection would be easily quelled.

Not silly, Fed law is supreme in all matters, whether the laws are reasonable, constitutional, or not... see fed success at stopping Arizonans from protecting themselves. The Fed going so far at to join a law suit with mexico against Arizonans.

You want to fix this country... you're gonna have to start in DC they own all the cards.

Ummmm ... okay, if you say so. We are obviously live in different dimensions.

As to quelling a major insurrection - something we definitely don't want here - the numbers don't favor the feds. The approximate total of all military personnel is about 2,500,000. The total number of armed citizens is over 100,000,000, perhaps well over, and how many with military training is anyone's guess. Now even assuming that all federal forces would feel free to fire upon Americans - an unlikely event considering the politics of our day - and also assuming that say oh, half of armed citizens stayed out of the fray, the numbers are overwhelming.

Even the Chinese have recognized that America could never be defeated by invasion. We have the largest civilian army in the world.

I do agree that DC is the place to start, but that does not render the states impotent.

Armed? Against tanks, helicopters, and fighter jets?

Count on your fingers. Consider Vietnam and ME. Insurgencies/belligerent powers are not to be trifled with.

And again, consider the likelihood that in this time much of the rank and file would bolt.

Vietnam had china's backing. We would have.... toys.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

A clarification cannot undo the original intent.

In that we agree.

At the risk of insurrection, I suppose.

That is a silly statement.

A clarification can completely neuter the original intent. See 17th amendment with the states no longer having a voice at all in DC. See 16th amendment with the feds being able to take the income away from a state and send it to other states. Together with the 14th, the original intent of the entire Constitution is now completely upside down, with the growth and power of the Federal Government to continue completely unabated. Look at these h1b visas.. ROFL they are bringing in cheap labor to replace professional American STEM workers and the people and states have ABSOLUTELY NO SAY WHATSOEVER ABOUT IT.

For example, Obamacare... sign up and receive the rewards that your tax payer's are forced to fun anyway or let the citizens of your state get completely screwed over by being forced to fund health care for other states with their income.

Insurrection? Have you not noticed every federal agency arming itself to the teeth? Internment camps going up all around the country? Tens of millions of "coffins" being prepped? The feds are insuring that any insurrection would be easily quelled.

Not silly, Fed law is supreme in all matters, whether the laws are reasonable, constitutional, or not... see fed success at stopping Arizonans from protecting themselves. The Fed going so far at to join a law suit with mexico against Arizonans.

You want to fix this country... you're gonna have to start in DC they own all the cards.

Ummmm ... okay, if you say so. We are obviously live in different dimensions.

As to quelling a major insurrection - something we definitely don't want here - the numbers don't favor the feds. The approximate total of all military personnel is about 2,500,000. The total number of armed citizens is over 100,000,000, perhaps well over, and how many with military training is anyone's guess. Now even assuming that all federal forces would feel free to fire upon Americans - an unlikely event considering the politics of our day - and also assuming that say oh, half of armed citizens stayed out of the fray, the numbers are overwhelming.

Even the Chinese have recognized that America could never be defeated by invasion. We have the largest civilian army in the world.

I do agree that DC is the place to start, but that does not render the states impotent.

Armed? Against tanks, helicopters, and fighter jets?

Count on your fingers. Consider Vietnam and ME. Insurgencies/belligerent powers are not to be trifled with.

And again, consider the likelihood that in this time much of the rank and file would bolt.

Vietnam had china's backing. We would have.... toys.

Oh please. In 1776 one third of colonists favored rebellion, one third favored Britain, one third didn't give a rat's ass for either. With some late assistance from France, the former defeated the greatest military force of the time. And you are still assuming no rank-and-file would bolt and bring their "toys" with them.

All this is academic, of course. The ballot box is still the battlefield here, a circumstance we'd best maintain.

 

[RKMBrown]

A clarification can completely neuter the original intent. See 17th amendment with the states no longer having a voice at all in DC. See 16th amendment with the feds being able to take the income away from a state and send it to other states. Together with the 14th, the original intent of the entire Constitution is now completely upside down, with the growth and power of the Federal Government to continue completely unabated. Look at these h1b visas.. ROFL they are bringing in cheap labor to replace professional American STEM workers and the people and states have ABSOLUTELY NO SAY WHATSOEVER ABOUT IT.

For example, Obamacare... sign up and receive the rewards that your tax payer's are forced to fun anyway or let the citizens of your state get completely screwed over by being forced to fund health care for other states with their income.

Insurrection? Have you not noticed every federal agency arming itself to the teeth? Internment camps going up all around the country? Tens of millions of "coffins" being prepped? The feds are insuring that any insurrection would be easily quelled.

Not silly, Fed law is supreme in all matters, whether the laws are reasonable, constitutional, or not... see fed success at stopping Arizonans from protecting themselves. The Fed going so far at to join a law suit with mexico against Arizonans.

You want to fix this country... you're gonna have to start in DC they own all the cards.

Ummmm ... okay, if you say so. We are obviously live in different dimensions.

As to quelling a major insurrection - something we definitely don't want here - the numbers don't favor the feds. The approximate total of all military personnel is about 2,500,000. The total number of armed citizens is over 100,000,000, perhaps well over, and how many with military training is anyone's guess. Now even assuming that all federal forces would feel free to fire upon Americans - an unlikely event considering the politics of our day - and also assuming that say oh, half of armed citizens stayed out of the fray, the numbers are overwhelming.

Even the Chinese have recognized that America could never be defeated by invasion. We have the largest civilian army in the world.

I do agree that DC is the place to start, but that does not render the states impotent.

Armed? Against tanks, helicopters, and fighter jets?

Count on your fingers. Consider Vietnam and ME. Insurgencies/belligerent powers are not to be trifled with.

And again, consider the likelihood that in this time much of the rank and file would bolt.

Vietnam had china's backing. We would have.... toys.

Oh please. In 1776 one third of colonists favored rebellion, one third favored Britain, one third didn't give a rat's ass for either. With some late assistance from France, the former defeated the greatest military force of the time. And you are still assuming no rank-and-file would bolt and bring their "toys" with them.

All this is academic, of course. The ballot box is still the battlefield here, a circumstance we'd best maintain.

In 1776 armies comprised people with single shot rifles, pretty much the same stuff the people used to hunt game. In 2015 armies comprise machine guns, TANKS, BOMBERS, FIGHTER JETS, RPGs, chemical weapons of mass destruction, pain machines that literally cook the enemy with microwaves, ... and the people have single shot repeating rifles.

As for the ballot box... it's stuffed. Both political parties are willing accomplices in maintaining federal hegemony over the people. You have only one choice.. and that is to vote for the two headed hydra or "throw away your vote" by choosing a libertarian or other party.

 

[Votto]

.The states can do nothing about it...
.

That is a silly statement.

Under Article V the states can rise up and amend the Constituion, the movement has alreay begun.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Ummmm ... okay, if you say so. We are obviously live in different dimensions.

As to quelling a major insurrection - something we definitely don't want here - the numbers don't favor the feds. The approximate total of all military personnel is about 2,500,000. The total number of armed citizens is over 100,000,000, perhaps well over, and how many with military training is anyone's guess. Now even assuming that all federal forces would feel free to fire upon Americans - an unlikely event considering the politics of our day - and also assuming that say oh, half of armed citizens stayed out of the fray, the numbers are overwhelming.

Even the Chinese have recognized that America could never be defeated by invasion. We have the largest civilian army in the world.

I do agree that DC is the place to start, but that does not render the states impotent.

Armed? Against tanks, helicopters, and fighter jets?

Count on your fingers. Consider Vietnam and ME. Insurgencies/belligerent powers are not to be trifled with.

And again, consider the likelihood that in this time much of the rank and file would bolt.

Vietnam had china's backing. We would have.... toys.

Oh please. In 1776 one third of colonists favored rebellion, one third favored Britain, one third didn't give a rat's ass for either. With some late assistance from France, the former defeated the greatest military force of the time. And you are still assuming no rank-and-file would bolt and bring their "toys" with them.

All this is academic, of course. The ballot box is still the battlefield here, a circumstance we'd best maintain.

In 1776 armies comprised people with single shot rifles, pretty much the same stuff the people used to hunt game. In 2015 armies comprise machine guns, TANKS, BOMBERS, FIGHTER JETS, RPGs, chemical weapons of mass destruction, pain machines that literally cook the enemy with microwaves, ... and the people have single shot repeating rifles.

The point is that smaller forces have often throughout history defeated the larger and better equipped ones, and it is unlikely American forces would be willing to decimate the country against its own people, as well as weakening itself and leaving the nation open to foreign invasion simply to satisfy the whims of erroneous federal political direction.

We have an insurmountable difference of opinion on this as well, and this has strayed a bit from the subject of the thread.

Fin.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Under Article V the states can rise up and amend the Constituion, the movement has alreay begun.

Bingo.

(BTW you missed a quote bumper)